Systematicity not enough to argue for classicism
Even if classicism provides the best account of systematicity, it doesn't follow that the mind has a classical architecture. Systematicity is just one of many phenomena that the theory of mind must explain (eg perception, imagination, emotion, etc).
To show that the mind has a classical architecture, then, the classicist must demonstrate that classicism does better than connectionism—or any other competing theory—accounting for all of the relevant phenomena, not just systematicity.

Michael Anthony, 1991.
CONTEXT(Help)
-
Artificial Intelligence »Artificial Intelligence
▲
Can computers think? [1] »Can computers think? [1]
▲
Yes: connectionist networks can think [5a] »Yes: connectionist networks can think [5a]
▲
The Connectionist Dilemma »The Connectionist Dilemma
■
Systematicity not enough to argue for classicism
●
Anthony misrepresents the argument »Anthony misrepresents the argument
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About